The Ethical Practice ofCritical Thinking

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:25 PM Page i

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:25 PM Page ii

The Ethical Practice ofCritical Thinking

Martin Clay FowlerDepartment of Philosophy

Elon University

Carolina Academic PressDurham, North Carolina

00 fowler final 6/13/08 9:33 AM Page iii

Copyright © 2008Martin Clay FowlerAll Rights Reserved

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Fowler, Martin, 1951-The ethical practice of critical thinking / by Martin Fowler.

p. cm.Includes bibliographical references and index.ISBN 10: 1-59460-503-3ISBN 13: 978-1-59460-503-1 (alk. paper)

1. Critical thinking. 2. Reasoning. 3. Ethics. I. Title.

BC177.F68 2008160--dc22

2008011854

Carolina Academic Press700 Kent Street

Durham, North Carolina 27701Telephone (919) 489-7486

Fax (919) 493-5668www.cap-press.com

Printed in the United States of America

00 fowler final 6/13/08 9:33 AM Page iv

Dedicated to Clyde

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:25 PM Page v

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:25 PM Page vi

Contents

Acknowledgments ix

Introduction xi

Chapter One • Sustaining Arguments 3A. Arguments Which Respect Intelligence and Humanity 5B. Arguments Which Matter 7C. Arguments Which Uphold Critical Thinking 9

Chapter Two • Principles and Skills ofEthical Argumentation 19

A. Doing Charitable Interpretation by Being Objective 22B. Honoring Matters of Substance through Learning

How to Suffer 30C. Practicing Great Scholarship by Remaining Curious 39D. Handling Conflict by Seeing When Enough Is Enough 47

Chapter Three • Thinking of Fallacies as Ethical Issues 63A. Appeal to Authority 64B. Begging the Question 68C. Appeals to Emotion 70D. Ad Hominem 74E. Appeal to Ignorance 80F. The Appeal to Force (Argumentum ad Baculum) 85G. The Sunburn Fallacy 89H. Fallacies Which Evolve, Stagnate, or Make Us

Worry about Nothing 91

vii

00 fowler final 6/13/08 9:34 AM Page vii

Chapter Four • The Ethical Practice of Doing the Math 97A. Do the Math 97B. I Am Not a Number! 101C. All Other Things Being Equal 105D. Fairness as a Math Skill 109

Chapter Five • Finding a Community of Discourse 115A. Letting Sleeping Dogs Starve 117B. Loyalty Oath 118C. Nobody Expects the Community of Discourse! 122D. Community Crashers 123E. The Cost of Community of Discourse 124

Notes on Sources 133Introduction: Uncovering the Ethics in Critical Thinking 133Chapter One: Sustaining Arguments 134Chapter Two: Principles and Skills for

Ethical Argumentation 136Chapter Three: Thinking of Fallacies as Ethical Issues 140Chapter Four: The Ethical Practice of Doing the Math 141Chapter Five: Finding a Community of Discourse 144

Name Index 147

Index 149

viii CONTENTS

00 fowler final 6/13/08 9:34 AM Page viii

ix

Acknowledgments

I needed a text to address the ethical issues which arise in thesocial practice of critical thinking skills, so, with the support andarguments of my colleagues in the Philosophy Department of ElonUniversity, I wrote this book. I hope it is the beginning of an ex-tended conversation and discourse about how worthwhile think-ing introduces us to worthwhile values and relationships.

For peerless peer review, I extend my gratitude to my colleagues,John Sullivan, Ann Cahill, Nim Batchelor, Anthony Weston, YoramLubling, Stephen Schulman, David Johnston, and Joe Cole. Theyincluded me in their community discourse and some of them bravelytried out this book in their Critical Thinking classes. Special thanksalso to all their students who pondered, argued, objected, and de-liberated about the ethics packed within critical thinking. It was agreat teacher-student shake-down cruise for this book, the first ofmany to come. If this book is the last place you expected to be, Ihope you’re not disappointed. Drop me a note at fowlerm@elon.eduif you have a tough question, helpful suggestion, strenuous objec-tion, or an idea to share. Of course, I will give you full credit if Iuse your idea in future editions.

Clyde Zuber and I diligently proofed the text and would be grate-ful for your courtesy in reporting to us any clerical or factual errors.My niece, Andrea Milligan, provided the photos of herself, theirfamily dog, Augustus, and her father, Dr. Richard Milligan. Spe-cial thanks to Robert Conrow at Carolina Academic Press for work-ing patiently with me in the preparation of this text.

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:25 PM Page ix

x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

There’s a “Notes and Sources” section at the back of this book toprovide students with an extensive annotated bibliography about thebooks I mention and recommend. A “Notes for Teachers” teach-ing guide should be available with this text for instructors.

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:25 PM Page x

xi

Introduction

Uncovering the Ethics in Critical Thinking

Ethics is the last place I expected to be when I began teaching phi-losophy because I taught both “critical thinking” and “ethical prac-tice” as separate courses. I hadn’t yet thought much about criticalthinking as an ethical practice in its own right. We casually treatthought and behavior as two independent kingdoms, so we don’thunt commonalities. For example, in critical thinking, you coulddistinguish form (critical thinking) from its content (such as ethics),or you might draw a distinction between the structure of argument(logic) and its techniques (rhetoric). Our distinctions quickly hardeninto pairs of mutually exclusive terms with no place for the humanrelationships created in the activity of critical thinking. A pair of dis-tinctions which takes itself too seriously will try to carve up theworld between them. A long argument with others can have un-expected detours, breakthroughs, reversals, and, after patience andluck, insights that stun and transform us. Our distinctions mightmiss all that. So, as the roses on the rhetoric and deduction wilt, don’tforget how hard it was to work out understanding of issues andtopics, despite great differences in perspective, lack of information,stubborn conflicts, and so much being at stake. We shouldn’t for-get the ethics inside critical thinking.

Discovering that ethics not only makes critical thinking comealive also allows us to give due recognition and honor to an under-celebrated part of our ethical life: making arguments which matter,about things which matter, with people who matter to each other. Ethicsis about showing respect, extending charity, achieving the best out-

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:25 PM Page xi

xii INTRODUCTION

come, and keeping each other honest, which are values we activelysustain when we persist in our best thinking together.

When you are taught critical thinking, you learn to identify an ar-gument’s conclusion and the credibility of its premises. You may beintroduced to new terms such as “valid” or “sound” arguments, andyou’re cautioned to spot and avoid invalid or fallacious inferences.You discover that critical thinking involves not only logic, but un-derstanding causal correlations, reasoning by analogy, or applyingstandards to assess available evidence in support of a position.

Even creative problem-solving is part of critical thinking. Learnthis, and you should be the very model of a critical thinker readyto set sail, eyes fixed on the horizon, hands firmly on the helm,captain of your ship of intellect, like the photo of Yours Truly.

Actually, it’s not my yacht. In fact, I don’t know how to sail. Thereal owner and pilot is busy outside the frame of the picture, ad-justing the rigging to take advantage of the breeze on Puget Sound.He trusted me for a few minutes to pay attention to the wind, keepthe yacht moving in a more or less straight line, and avoid ram-ming any other boats (also outside the frame of the picture). It’s nota bad metaphor for ethical argumentation. Real sailing, like realarguing, involves coordination and adjustment between people andwith the elements at hand. It can be tricky to work with others tokeep an argument on track without veering off course or windingup in a collision. It requires trust. It only looks as though you couldmanage it alone and single-handedly.

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xii

INTRODUCTION xiii

That brings us to the puppy. This is a very hungry little dog sinceno one has reached out to feed this unnamed pitiful puppy. Whybother? After all, it’s featured in this book only as a teaching toolto make a point about critical thinking. Yes, it’s a starving teachingtool, and we feel bad or should feel bad about not feeding the dog,but thinking is not about feelings, right? Why should an animal’sappetite or our guilt matter to logic? Why should what we do ornot do about the precious puppy matter if we’re just learning howto think clearly about this canine? We either reason cogently aboutthis neglected heart-breaking pup which depends entirely upon usfor its very life, or we don’t.

So, at the risk of committing a string of fallacies such as beg-ging the question (How long have you been starving this puppy?)and appeals to emotion (the right conclusion is the one which feelsgood to us), we must concede that it’s hard to keep thinking aboutthe puppy without considering what matters to us, what we ought

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xiii

xiv INTRODUCTION

to do, and how we can think of a way to help the puppy. That yearn-ing and questioning is not necessarily a distraction from reason-ing. We’ve uncovered ethics hiding inside critical thinking.

Critical thinking, like any sustained, complex human activitywhich affects people, does have a rich ethical landscape. That land-scape concerns what we can call “sustaining arguments.” A sus-taining argument keeps a discussion alive and growing by upholdingworthy standards of critical thinking. A sustaining argument sup-ports the members of the community by unfolding so as to re-spect their dignity and their need to think together and makedecisions about things which matter for them. Finally, the sus-taining argument protects and honors community of discourse it-self as a place which is worth arguing in. In fact, to use sustainingarguments to think critically well, at length, and about topics thatmatter calls for certain principles. Sustaining arguments show cer-tain principles:

1. Sustaining arguments respect the intelligence and humanityof the both the arguer and intended audience by helping ratherthan hindering our ability to think, and by supporting rather thanundermining a community of discourse. We can achieve this byapplying the principle of charitable interpretation: choose the mostplausible interpretation of the arguer’s words and the best reason-ing to be found in those words. A necessary skill for practicing thisprinciple is objectivity.

2. Sustaining arguments prove something worth discussing,allow questioning which decisions are worth considering, or leadto commitments worth making. We can achieve this by applying theprinciple of substance: choose only matters and issues for argu-ments which deserve your best thinking, facilitate necessary deci-sions, and in which there are stakes that matter for the benefit ordetriment of all concerned. A necessary skill for practicing thisprinciple is suffering. Feeling pain takes no skill, of course, butlearning how to best bear one’s pain or share the pain of othersdoes demand learning and proficiency. Also, if you haven’t suffered

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xiv

INTRODUCTION xv

1. A short and excellent book on this subject is The Little Book of Con-flict Transformation by John Paul Lederach (Good Books, 1969). Lederachprovides a map and framework for navigating conflict in ways that ulti-mately transform rather than destroy relationships. According to Leder-ach, argument does not resolve conflict in a steady path of progress. Itmay progress, then stall, regress or even fall apart only to transform inbetter ways. The path is more spiral than linear. Each stage is a “suffi-ciency” rather than as a terminus. Perhaps if we don’t impose this agesand stages approach a priori but instead use and test it empirically, we canbetter navigate and even transform seemingly irreconcilable conflicts.

or at least known pain, you probably haven’t thought much or verywell about what really matters.

3. Sustaining arguments are also necessarily good argumentswhich are factually based and logically coherent. We can achievethis by applying the principle of scholarship: Acknowledge anddeal with the obstacles to knowledge effectively enough to investi-gate the truth of propositions, test the strength of inferences, andevaluate the merits of an argument. A necessary skill for practicingthis principle is curiosity. Scholarship which is not inquisitive hasnot applied this principle adequately. Scholarship may involve ac-curately cited quotes and footnotes, but making references with-out digging for knowledge and understanding doesn’t apply theprinciple of scholarship adequately. Scholarship is not only cour-teous but nosey too.

4. Sustaining arguments are also arguments which strengthen acommunity as it confronts and learns from the conflicts, impasses,failures, and sacrifices which are part of arguing together as a com-munity. We can achieve this by applying the principle of conflict.Acknowledge that any good argument invites conflict1 and that thecommunity of discourse is charged with working effectively throughthe conflicts in its arguments. The community is sustained by theway that it handles its conflicts in argument. A necessary skill toapply this principle is that of sufficiency. That’s the skill of know-ing when “enough is enough” and a conflict cannot usefully movefurther without major changes.

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xv

xvi INTRODUCTION

By way of further introduction, the ethics we find inside criticalthinking leads us not only into arguments, but also into fallacies, rea-soning about numbers, and reconciling conflicts. Happily, we windup with the community of people willing to think together. Thisclub, gang, committee, society, pack, salon, or team may be a pre-dictable pod of kindred spirits, or a surprise kaleidoscopic com-munity of like-minded souls. When we started thinking, it’s the lastplace we expected to be, but it won’t be such a bad destination.

It’s hard to think of a subject for critical thinking that you couldpursue entirely on your own or which is so completely removedfrom human concerns and consequences that it could have no eth-ical implications whatsoever. My undergraduate choice would havebeen figuring out how to conjugate and remember German verbsin an 8:00 a.m. class. I really had no plans to ever visit Germany.Still, learning German meant learning how to communicate and tak-ing responsibility for how I would use this skill. I consoled myselfthat the mental exercise was valuable all by itself. At the very least,I encouraged my instructor who complimented me on showing upand having the nerve to form complete sentences even when I lackedthe correct vocabulary. (At least I think it was a compliment.)Thirty years later, I encountered some German tourists in Thai-land who turned to me for help. You just never know what ethicalopportunities might be opened by your critical thinking skills.

So, why argue instead of just sitting down to talk about whatmatters to you, in German or otherwise? Why does critical think-ing depend on arguments? A conversation which makes a good ar-gument does more than share thoughts. You help each other to linkthoughts together in a trustworthy way. The conversation uncov-ers the destination of those linked thoughts and the fact that theyactually do have a destination. Yes, we also need to express our-selves. And we need to reflect, remember, plan, and get perspec-tive. Conversation helps meet all those needs. But conversing throughan argument allows us to remain objective enough for honest think-ing and curious enough to persist in our scholarship together. Itleads us to learn from each other’s suffering as to what’s worth ar-

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xvi

INTRODUCTION xvii

guing about, and to know when we’ve argued enough. “Critical” think-ing is not just analysis. It’s the skilled exercise of our full range ofcognitive skills together. That’s why it’s also an ethical practice.

Let me say a few words about the “shares.” In other texts, theseitems are called “exercises,” “assignments” or “homework.” Thoseterms imply that the author gives you instructions about how toperform a pre-conceived task. The author and perhaps a teacherexpect you to learn something worthwhile from accomplishing thetask. By doing the exercise, task, or assignment, you may get a re-ward such as a good grade. Expectations and rewards make up onesort of ethical relationship between the author of the textbook andthe student who reads it. You’re expected do the work and get a re-ward for your labor. It’s appropriate to teaching skills, figuring outproblems, or memorizing information. If that assignment isn’t partof your homework, you skip it.

However, the ethical practice of critical thinking, calls for a dif-ferent relationship. You and I belong to a community of discourse.We’re dealing with issues that don’t simply matter to me or to youalone. You have a bigger stake than a one-time grade or storing upsome learning. Therefore, you have a share in this community. It’snot very likely that you’ll have to do all fifty of these shares as home-work, but don’t skip any of them. Each share teaches about theethical practice of critical thinking, so be patient and read throughthem. I’m sharing something with you. You’re hereby allowed, em-powered, entitled and otherwise invited to enjoy them even whenthey aren’t building your grade or your work ethic.

Do you remember being told to share when you were a child? That’sone of the first ethical practice lessons we receive as children. Thinkof sharing both ways. If you are in a classroom, share what youlearn with others, not just with the teacher. You are a shareholderin this community, but being a shareholder also means sharingwhat you learn with other shareholders. That’s not a bad first de-finition of scholarship.

For example, we shut our underfed puppy inside a container to

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xvii

xviii INTRODUCTION

think about him critically and without distractions. He’s confinedfor the sake of argument. We now think hard about the whimper-ing puppy, as such, but we share no food with him. What do yousuppose he’ll share when he finally gets out of that box? Criticalthinking is also a real relationship with others, so be nice and shareyour shares..

The fifty shares spread throughout this book are your portfolio inthe ethics of critical thinking. You may share your shares with yourteacher alone, but you’re also working with others and learning fromthem. Each share is more than a fleeting relationship between youreyes and a book. Each scholar quoted in this book shares somethingwith you. Think of it as a gift, if you like. If you really can’t use a par-ticular gift, pass it along to someone who’ll enjoy the gift and yourgenerosity. If you don’t like it at all, keep in mind that these are giftsfor which it really is the thought that counts. Keep thinking.

Your first three shares are about maps. Did you ever think ofdrawing a map as critical thinking? A map requires clear, consistent

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xviii

INTRODUCTION xix

relationships among accurately represented items. The map shouldbe complex enough to be complete, but not so complex that it be-comes cluttered. If the map marks directions, it’s analogous to mak-ing a good argument which leads to a conclusion. But maps, likearguments, are also ethical enterprises. We’re expected to trust andrely upon them. To draw a map, we pick sites which matter to aparticular community, point out boundaries and causeways, showwhere we and others belong and keep people from getting lost.When we follow a map, we participate in those relationships. Cen-turies ago, explorers’ maps could be state secrets. Stealing or falsi-fying a map could have serious consequences. As a type of thinkingtogether, mapmaking and map-following are ethical practices.

Share No. 1 How do you make a map for something whichhas no context? Perhaps nothing simply crawls out from undera rock, drops from outer space, or pops into being through spon-taneous generation, but sometimes an item confronts us verymuch like that. It’s a challenge to think critically about somethingwhich has no apparent connection to any of our familiar pointsof reference. Let’s start with a tamper. Are you a tamper? Doyou have a tamper? Are tampers good or bad? If you’re uncer-tain, work with the verb. You know that “tampering” can meaninterfering in a harmful way. But consider that you can tamptoo much into your glove compartment or trash compactor. So,tamping is cramming or mashing some aggregate into a smallspace. A vegetable juicer uses a plastic tamper to compress pulp.Thinking about this has no ethical shadows, colors, or mass yet.But consider that you only tamp something which you’re will-ing to treat roughly, almost as refuse. You don’t mash, crush, ortamp compassionately or with much respect for what you cram.(Think about that when you cram for a final exam . . . )

Now pick a different sort of “tamper” such as 55 Cancri. Thisis 41 light years from earth, yet, as you think critically about itsphysical relationships, questions of human value and meaningalso arise. Unexpectedly, thinking about 55 Cancri shapes ourown ethical practice. Look up this “tamper” or another news,

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xix

xx INTRODUCTION

science, or business topic that has currently has no context foryou. Next, brainstorm about how this topic affects people’s lives.Keep thinking until you discover how thinking about it with oth-ers affects how people treat each other and their world. Youaren’t making unlikely connections between unrelated things. Asa critical thinker, you’re putting a new topic on the “ethics map”of human values, concerns, relationships, needs, and aspira-tions. You’re building a context nest for your new topic. The con-nections already exist. You’re uncovering and articulating them.What kind of ethical issues (rights, duties, values, virtues, ben-efit, harm, principles, good vs. evil, right vs. wrong) come up?Try to find either a subject so specialized that your group (“com-munity of discourse”) has no expertise about it, or take a verymundane area of research (e.g. fertilizers or food packaging)and show an ethical issue that your group might otherwise havenever considered. Show why this “tamper” matters for us. Writea 5-page research paper on this new topic.

“It is notorious that (Francis) Bacon regularly describedscientific activity in oddly savage imagery, incorporat-ing violent conquest as a central part of his originalmyth of scientific supremacy. Bacon repeatedly insistedthat the aim of the new science must not be just to ‘exerta gentle guidance over Nature’s course’ but ‘to conquerand subdue her, to shake her to her foundation’.”— Science and Poetry by Mary Midgley (2001)

Great thinkers are more often posthumously blamed than praisedfor all consequences of their ideas and arguments. If future gener-ations really could file class action suits for reparations from pastphilosophers, I suspect there would be much less philosophizingor at least much less interesting philosophy. Questions of blameand praise aside, ideas and arguments help or hinder people intheir thinking and can be expected to take on a life of their ownbeyond our needs and understanding and beyond their originalcommunity of discourse. Prof. Mary Midgley argues that the 16thcentury philosopher, Francis Bacon argued so persuasively that

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xx

INTRODUCTION xxi

science is a conquest of nature, that this way of thinking eventuallybecame sufficiently ingrained in Western culture such that our en-vironment has been conquered to the point of devastation andrapid extinction of thousands of species. If she’s right, that’s quitea serious legacy. Words can inflict massive historical damage.

Influential thinking has moral consequences, but that doesn’tmean that we simply moralize with hindsight about unforeseenethical ramifications of past thinking. For example, a great deal ofthinking has gone into extraction, refining, production, market-ing, transportation, and utilization of petroleum over the past cen-tury. This thinking led to increased carbon emissions, pollution,global warming, and environmental crisis. We shouldn’t fault pastthinkers for what they could not predict. We might fault them (andourselves) for thinking as if problem-solving were self-containedand autonomous in a way which dispenses with ethical burdens.We can do that when we shrug and say “It’s just a job.” Doing crit-ical thinking, whether for pay or not, as though it could have noth-ing to do with ethical practice is culpable because it means thinkingtogether as though treating others and our shared world with re-spect, compassion, and care is justifiably irrelevant.

Share No. 2 I invite you to do Internet and library researchabout Project Chariot. When you discover what this project wasabout forty years ago, it will be very tempting to retrospectivelymoralize about its ethics. Resist the temptation. Write a 5-page re-search paper about the kinds of critical thinking which the pro-ject required: scientific, political, economic, and military. Identifyany ethical issues which this thinking uncovered, created, or triedto bury. Which features of this ethical practice were unknown tothe critical thinkers on all sides involved in Project Chariot? Whichfeatures were considered unimportant? Think of this as an ethicalmap of the sort of public thinking carried out in this project.

Share No. 3 For your third share, you get to map yourself.A widely shared and feared human experience is being lost.One of the promises which a map implies is protection against

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xxi

xxii INTRODUCTION

being or staying lost. “You are here.” If you’re on a college cam-pus, look at the buildings around you, draw a map of the cam-pus which would be accurate enough to guide an incomingfirst year student to classes at your college. Then check to seehow accurate it really is. Next, draw a map of the social ge-ography of your college. A first-year student can’t locate him-self or herself unless they know what groups they belong in ordon’t belong in. What features would the map contain andwhere would you find yourself? Would the first-year student bein the middle, on the bottom, the center, on the margins, orelsewhere? What sort of ethical questions would an incomingfirst year student ask upon examining your social map of yourcollege? (Does the map imply that some people are not goodenough to belong in some groups?) The map below is for mycampus, Elon University. Write an essay containing your mapand your proposed ethical questions. If you’re not in college,draw a map of your place of employment (Good luck if you doyour work online!) to orient a new employee, and then draw amap of the social geography. It’s not necessarily the same as achart of the personnel dept.’s management structure. It may notbe a treasure map, but it’s still a gift to help folks find them-selves and what’s expected of them. Don’t simply turn this mapin as an “assignment.” Share it and explain it to three otherpeople first.

“Invention of the weather map around 1816 raises per-haps the most intriguing question in the history of en-vironmental cartography: What took them so long? . . .lacking exemplars to mimic and spatial hypotheses totest, no one thought that cartographic snapshots ofbarometric pressure and wind might prove revealing . . .Heinrich Wilhelm Brandes argued that plotting graphicsymbols on a map would be more revealing than merelylisting the data.” — Air Apparent — How MeteorologyLearned to Map, Predict, and Dramatize the Weatherby Mark Monmonier (1999)

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xxii

INTRODUCTION xxiii

Mark Monmonier suggests that the lack of weather maps before1816 was not due to the absence of modern technology but ratheran inability to think of weather as mapable. People thought thatonly stable landmarks such as oceans and continents were suitablefor maps. Because we see dynamic computer-generated weathermaps on TV each day, it is hard to conceive that the very project ofmapping the weather was once inconceivable. Perhaps the Internetwill be mapable one day. That would be a useful though risky map.

Share No. 4 Write a 3-page essay about how a reliable andwidely available Internet map would make an ethical differencefor your decisions. Illustrate your essay by drawing a map of theInternet. Decide the purpose of your map. Would you want torestrict access to your map? Would your map show servers,search engines, domains, users, sites, or other items? If you’re “onthe Internet,” then where, if anywhere, are you on the map? Re-search online for topographical models of the Internet. Somemodels map domain densities or other features of the Internet.A traffic map and a geological map can both be good maps ofthe same area. Would your map keep people from getting lostin the “area” of cyberspace?

You are here. What are you going to do about it?

00 fowler cx2 5/28/08 4:26 PM Page xxiii